Prenatal Screening for Anomalies: Between Clinical Finality and Selective Finality

This article summarizes the results of two works of research carried out independently of one another in France. What makes it possible to present them together – like two facets of a medical practice – is the question of prenatal screening and the ethical problems which arise for people who are ver...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Danielle Moyse, Nicole Diederich
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Stockholm University Press 2007-11-01
Series:Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research
Online Access:https://www.sjdr.se/articles/267
id doaj-8b6928f86fa44271aad2c43e54115b09
record_format Article
spelling doaj-8b6928f86fa44271aad2c43e54115b092020-11-25T00:01:48ZengStockholm University PressScandinavian Journal of Disability Research1501-74191745-30112007-11-0193-425427710.1080/15017410701680597197Prenatal Screening for Anomalies: Between Clinical Finality and Selective FinalityDanielle Moyse0Nicole Diederich1Centre d'Etude des Mouvements Sociaux (CEMS-EHESS), Paris, FranceINSERM, CEMS-EHESS, Paris, FranceThis article summarizes the results of two works of research carried out independently of one another in France. What makes it possible to present them together – like two facets of a medical practice – is the question of prenatal screening and the ethical problems which arise for people who are very much involved in this field, albeit in radically different ways: disabled persons on the one hand, and obstetrician-gynaecologists and ultrasonographers on the other. The people interviewed for the purposes of these two works of research throw an interesting light on the matter, based on their experiences and impressions. With regard to the disabled persons, it was a case of trying to remedy the social attitude which considers that they have nothing to say on these questions, despite the fact that they are of direct concern. Regarding the study of ultrasonographers and obstetrician-gynaecologists, the aim was to gain an understanding of how they had got through the intense debate that followed the Perruche ruling and the consequences of “life or prejudicial birth” actions on their professional practices and their views on the finality of prenatal screening.https://www.sjdr.se/articles/267
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Danielle Moyse
Nicole Diederich
spellingShingle Danielle Moyse
Nicole Diederich
Prenatal Screening for Anomalies: Between Clinical Finality and Selective Finality
Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research
author_facet Danielle Moyse
Nicole Diederich
author_sort Danielle Moyse
title Prenatal Screening for Anomalies: Between Clinical Finality and Selective Finality
title_short Prenatal Screening for Anomalies: Between Clinical Finality and Selective Finality
title_full Prenatal Screening for Anomalies: Between Clinical Finality and Selective Finality
title_fullStr Prenatal Screening for Anomalies: Between Clinical Finality and Selective Finality
title_full_unstemmed Prenatal Screening for Anomalies: Between Clinical Finality and Selective Finality
title_sort prenatal screening for anomalies: between clinical finality and selective finality
publisher Stockholm University Press
series Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research
issn 1501-7419
1745-3011
publishDate 2007-11-01
description This article summarizes the results of two works of research carried out independently of one another in France. What makes it possible to present them together – like two facets of a medical practice – is the question of prenatal screening and the ethical problems which arise for people who are very much involved in this field, albeit in radically different ways: disabled persons on the one hand, and obstetrician-gynaecologists and ultrasonographers on the other. The people interviewed for the purposes of these two works of research throw an interesting light on the matter, based on their experiences and impressions. With regard to the disabled persons, it was a case of trying to remedy the social attitude which considers that they have nothing to say on these questions, despite the fact that they are of direct concern. Regarding the study of ultrasonographers and obstetrician-gynaecologists, the aim was to gain an understanding of how they had got through the intense debate that followed the Perruche ruling and the consequences of “life or prejudicial birth” actions on their professional practices and their views on the finality of prenatal screening.
url https://www.sjdr.se/articles/267
work_keys_str_mv AT daniellemoyse prenatalscreeningforanomaliesbetweenclinicalfinalityandselectivefinality
AT nicolediederich prenatalscreeningforanomaliesbetweenclinicalfinalityandselectivefinality
_version_ 1725440271580135424